Jump to content

Two Transfer Window Ban?


Recommended Posts


12 minutes ago, Boston Blue said:

If 20 November is when they hear the appeal, when might we expect a decision?

In other cases the parties have agreed that the decision be announced  before written reasons published .

A good example is the Real Madrid case.

They made an application for what’s called an “Expedited Procedure “ Their appeal was then heard by a sole arbitrator on the 14th December 2016. CAS notified all parties of its decision on 20/12/2016.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone worrying that the ban will continue through January, don't.

Knowing that lot, now that they see Chelsea doing very well with youth players they'll be itching to reverse that ban, they might even give an extra 200m in compensation for the club to spend on players just see all this good work implode. 😂

Then they'll slap a restriction on how many youth players are allowed to play per game. 😛

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

So first half of December then.

Tbh I’m not even arsed if it gets uplifted or not, we have a great squad and it should be enough for this season. We’ve missed Rudiger, RLC and Kante a lot.

When they come back it will feel like such a big boost! And it’s January, who can we realistically sign really? Tbh I’d rather us not sign anyone! January window is usually second rate signings, and do we really need any? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
5 hours ago, JM7 said:

My bet is that we won’t have it uplifted. There’s too many players that we’ve supposedly illegally signed for us to be not guilty. 

It's a farce anyway, it's all to do with politics and Roman Abramovich it's obvious, the sh*t City and PSG get away with these days, City have been having investigations for the last 10 years and sweet FA has happened to them. 

Barcelona were supposed to get a ban for the Neymar transfer and f**k all happened, they were still allowed to sign Turan and Vidal, and keep Song on loan. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Slojo said:

It's a farce anyway, it's all to do with politics and Roman Abramovich it's obvious, the sh*t City and PSG get away with these days, City have been having investigations for the last 10 years and sweet FA has happened to them. 

Barcelona were supposed to get a ban for the Neymar transfer and f**k all happened, they were still allowed to sign Turan and Vidal, and keep Song on loan. 

They signed Turan but he could only train for six months.

We could have done the same if we wanted and the player agreed to it.

Edited by Argo
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Argo said:

They signed Turan but he could only train for six months.

We could have done the same if we wanted and the player agreed to it.

So he was allowed to be registered in January? That's still very lenient. How many slap on the wrists do City get these days. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I could have sworn I saw a SkySports tweet this morning with breaking news that said CAS had upheld the ban.  Now there is no tweet from them at all regarding the ban from today.  Now there are all kinds of unsubstantiated stories claiming that the ban will be reduced.  Proving, everyone wants to be first with the news, but no one really knows what is going on.

Edited by Boston Blue
Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Boston Blue said:

I could have sworn I saw a SkySports tweet this morning with breaking news that said CAS had upheld the ban.  Now there is no tweet from them at all regarding the ban from today.  Now there are all kinds of unsubstantiated stories claiming that the ban will be reduced.  Proving, everyone wants to be first with the news, but no one really knows what is going on.

I think people go too far the other way these days, people are so convinced everyone is lying/guessing including one's that have historically credible sources.

Many things get leaked in advance and turn out to be spot on (for example David Martin coming in for West Ham at Stamford Bridge), there was also numerous spreads in papers detailing how Lampard was going to run Chelsea which were all pretty much on the money.

I have a friend who's a journalist and according to him any piece with 'a source within the club' in it is often information given by the man who the main topic of the article in question.

Edited by Argo
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Argo said:

I think people go too far the other way these days, people are so convinced everyone is lying/guessing including one's that have historically credible sources.

Many things get leaked in advance and turn out to be spot on (for example David Martin coming in for West Ham at Stamford Bridge), there was also numerous spreads in papers detailing how Lampard was going to run Chelsea which were all pretty much on the money.

I have a friend who's a journalist and according to him any piece with 'a source within the club' in it is often information given by the man who the main topic of the article in question.

I questioned one of these "insiders" on Twitter earlier today.  His post said his sources inside the club said no decision has been received from CAS and we shouldn't believe anything we read.  I pointed out how ironic it was that we should believe a tweet from him when he's pointing out that we shouldn't believe everything we read.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, evissy said:

https://www.chelseafc.com/en/news/2019/12/06/chelsea-football-club-statement-on-appeal-verdict

Excellent statement from the club. We probably have to wait for FIFA's response... A couple of years.

Yes. Great statement that highlights the corrupt and vindictive nature of football's governing body. This is the second time they have been found to have treated us unfairly. 

It's interesting that, now the majority of their findings have been thrown out, there is no longer the discrepancy on the number and scale of our alleged transgressions between us and Man City. It was this discrepancy that was the basis of FIFa letting City off with a warning.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Well, this is awkward!

awkward the office GIF

The Shed End Forum relies on revenue to pay for hosting and upgrades. While we try to keep adverts as unobtrusive as possible without pop ups or video adverts, we need to run ad's to make sure we can stay online and continue to keep the forum up, as over the years costs have become very high.

Could you please allow adverts on this domain by switching it off. Some of the advert banners can actually be closed to avoid interferance of your experience on The Shed End.

Cheers now!

emma watson yes GIF

Alright already, It's off!